Eye Of The Tiger
Lionel Tiger on the failure rate of marriages:
"It is...astonishing that...marriage is still legally allowed. If nearly half of anything ended so disastrously, the government would surely ban it immediately. If half the tacos served in restaurants caused dysentery, if half the people learning karate broke their palms, if only 6% of people who went on roller coasters damaged their middle ears, the public would be clamoring for action."
Parsing of the divorce rate stats here.
> If nearly half of anything ended
> so disastrously
A meal that ends in dysentery shows much less promise than the life of an (otherwise healthy) spouse whose marriage ends.
Proportion, OK?
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 2:52 AM
What, losing the war on poverty and the war on drugs wasn't enough for you? Now you want to have a war on divorce too?
brian at April 16, 2009 4:41 AM
I've heard that 97% of happy marriages don't end in divorce? (Can't put my finger on the study though...)
Jody Tresidder at April 16, 2009 6:10 AM
I wouldn't outlaw divorce, but I'd consider elimination of no fault divorce. Ideally, though, marriage would be treated like any other contract, so if you were so inclined you could create a marriage contract that allowed no fault divorce.
Pseudonym at April 16, 2009 6:10 AM
Jody - that's like saying 100% of lives end in death. It's obviously true, and completely meaningless.
Greater than 50% of all marriages embarked upon today will end in divorce within five years.
brian at April 16, 2009 6:54 AM
You know, 100% of divorces are caused by marriage.
Pirate Jo at April 16, 2009 7:24 AM
PJo - heard that one, too. Marriage is the leading cause of divorce world-wide. Instead of "teabagging" politicians we should be demanding an end to marriage!
Gretchen at April 16, 2009 7:54 AM
Marriage is insane. I learned that the hard way.
But far be it for me to stop people from being crazier than me. To each their own.
But definitely don't outlaw divorce. Every contract should have an out clause.
T's Grammy at April 16, 2009 8:13 AM
Bitter, bitter, bitter.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 9:25 AM
So you guys are basically saying "Marriage is silly but let's let more people (gays) get married because they have a right"
Ppen at April 16, 2009 9:35 AM
I reserve the right to be a fool in love.
MonicaP at April 16, 2009 9:45 AM
Personally, I'm happily married. I'd be fine with the government not recognizing marriages legally; I'd have still gotten "married." However, since they do, I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a longer waiting period before a couple could be married. For example, in TX you have to get your marriage license 3 days before you actually get married. In Nevada, I think the waiting period is something like a few hours. Make a few months.
There is an asshole in our state legislature who is trying to legally mandate a TWO YEAR waiting period before a couple can divorce. I think it's a horrible idea. What if one's hubands has knocked up his assistant? What if one's wife is ruining his credit out of spite? There's also the obvious spousal abuse issue. [Side note: this particular bill makes an exception for abuse victims. I think this would likely increase false claims of domestic abuse in order to expedite the process, so once again, men lose.]
Anyhow, I realize divorce is ugly and all, but I don't think it should be hard to get one. If anything, it should be hard to get married.
ahw at April 16, 2009 10:05 AM
> So you guys are basically saying
> "Marriage is silly but let's let
> more people (gays) get married
> because they have a right"
Ppen is my new blog heroine.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 10:21 AM
I think I'll call her "Penny".
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 10:22 AM
I'll pay attention as soon as somebody comes up with a system that provides better outcomes for the kids.
That single mother thing isn't working out too well. It takes a village is too reminiscent of the public schools for me.
Marriage is like capitalism. A terrible system that happens to work better than the alternatives.
MarkD at April 16, 2009 10:26 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/16/eye_of_the_tige.html#comment-1643580">comment from MarkDI am completely for intact families for child-rearing. Think you owe it to your kids. And to make your family life happy and conflict free, and I really don't care what that takes out of you. Once you toss the birth control, you and your needs stop coming first.
Amy Alkon at April 16, 2009 10:36 AM
> I'll pay attention as soon as
> somebody comes up with a system
> that provides better outcomes
> for the kids.
This MarkD chap has good posture too. (Have you met Penny?)
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 10:36 AM
"Every contract should have an out clause."
Translation: The meaning of "contract" is turned upside down; now, there is no certainty, and the breaching party is rewarded for their breach. In the "real" world, a party has to PAY SOMETHING (its called "consideration") for that out-clause.
Ppen,
As Crid noted, nice!
I'm grudgingly ok with "no fault" divorce when no kids are involved, and both parties simply walk away with half of the assets acquired during the marriage, or whatever has been agreed in a pre-nup. No support, ever.
When kids are involved, no fault divorce is an abomination for the kids and thus for society, especially as it is actually being wielded to force men from their children's lives, all in the name of "protecting" women (or should I now refer to them as "womdren"?)
Jay R at April 16, 2009 10:42 AM
Outlawing no-fault divorces won't help. My state didn't allow for one, so I just let my ex lie and say I wasn't putting out. People will just get more creative.
MonicaP at April 16, 2009 10:46 AM
BTW,
Lest anyone think I'm being hard on the ladies, keep in mind that upwards of 3/4 of divorces are initiated by women, where in the vast majority of cases there is no allegation of infidelity or abuse. And, of course, some percentage of the divorces initiated by men come only after they discover their wife's infidelity.
So, the statistics show not so much that marriage itself is failing, as they show that women are miserably failing marriage, all to the detriment of men, children, and the future of society.
Darn! Just how ARE we going to fix women, and so save marriage?
Jay R at April 16, 2009 10:51 AM
> In the "real" world, a party has
> to PAY SOMETHING (its called
> "consideration") for that out
More good horse sense!
Have you met Mark & Penny?
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 16, 2009 10:53 AM
Outlawing no-fault divorces won't help. My state didn't allow for one, so I just let my ex lie and say I wasn't putting out.
Plus, because it is a state issue and not a fed, all states have to opt-in.
IIRC, back in the 40's and 50's you could go to Reno, NV or Mexico and get a quickie divorce i.e. 2 or 3 days.
Jim P. at April 16, 2009 10:56 AM
What is the Fastest Way to Get Unhitched?
Further expansion: What they do is enter a judgment of Dissolution of the Marriage but the property settlement is done later.
Jim P. at April 16, 2009 11:00 AM
Let's outlaw college! Plenty of people don't manage to finish it either.
I am appalled at the high divorce rate, and yes I am divorced. But the rate isn't steady, there are lots of subgroups with different rates. Some are fairly low.
Also, we have to keep in mind marriages were ended by early death much more frequently in the past, even the recent past. Till death do us part is a long haul when you can expect to reach 90 as opposed to, say 60.
I am all for mandatory premarital counseling covering childrearing and finances. Something akin to a learner's permit, while you're engaged, then you can marry when you fulfill the requirements. I definately think harder to get into is the way to go rather than easier to get out.
momof3 at April 16, 2009 11:13 AM
Momof3: I definately think harder to get into is the way to go rather than easier to get out.
Hear, hear!!
Jay R at April 16, 2009 12:32 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/16/eye_of_the_tige.html#comment-1643610">comment from Jim P.What is the Fastest Way to Get Unhitched?
Avoid getting married, avoid living together, tell the person it's over and tell them when they can come over and pack their toothbrush and the stuff in the drawers you gave them. Of course, I find not living together is a great way to make a relationship last instead of descending into bitterness at the other person not picking up whatever it is that you would really, really like them to pick up. If that shit's on their floor at home, well, you really don't have anything to say about it, and it's not part of your relationship.
Amy Alkon at April 16, 2009 12:48 PM
"If that shit's on their floor at home, well, you really don't have anything to say about it, and it's not part of your relationship."
Amy, you are dreaming if you think most women still won't complain about what lazy slobs men are -- they aren't about to give up one of their favorite hobbies! Either the guy will get nagged to clean up, or the chick will clean up, then complain about it.
We both know how this works ... .
Jay R at April 16, 2009 1:32 PM
What is the Fastest Way to Get Unhitched?
Die suddenly.
Conan the Grammarian at April 16, 2009 1:39 PM
It is...astonishing that...marriage is still legally allowed. If nearly half of anything ended so disastrously, the government would surely ban it immediately ...
By those standards, it is astonishing humans are still allowed.
Hey Skipper at April 16, 2009 2:06 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/16/eye_of_the_tige.html#comment-1643641">comment from Conan the GrammarianWhat is the Fastest Way to Get Unhitched? Die suddenly.
Much better than mine!
Amy Alkon at April 16, 2009 2:26 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/16/eye_of_the_tige.html#comment-1643642">comment from Jay R"If that shit's on their floor at home, well, you really don't have anything to say about it, and it's not part of your relationship." Amy, you are dreaming if you think most women still won't complain about what lazy slobs men are -- they aren't about to give up one of their favorite hobbies! Either the guy will get nagged to clean up, or the chick will clean up, then complain about it. We both know how this works ... .
What I see, Jay R, is that you are just one big long howl about the awfulness of women. Some women are horrible nags. I'm not. And I know others who are not. But, you have to take responsibility for who you let into your life. Your comments have a familiar undertone to me -- that of a certain kind of men's movement guy who squawks endlessly about the "feminazis," and what psychos and bitches WOMEN are, when the real problem isn't WOMEN but a particular woman -- one he married without giving too much thought to who she really was. Much easier to blame all women for being bitches or whatever than to take personal responsibility for who you let into your life.
After I got out of my 20s (the mistake-making years -- which ideally teach you a thing or two) I dated tons of assholes. Once, maybe twice. I looked very closely at men to see who they were and spent much of my 30s alone. Gregg's a great person, but I earned him by not getting into a relationship with just anybody, which might've meant I would've had a boyfriend that day I met him at the Apple computer store at The Grove. (Where I photo'd the cute bunny ears couple the other day -- Lauren and Dan.)
Amy Alkon at April 16, 2009 2:33 PM
Amy, my lovely and loving wife of 29 years would be surprised to see your comment. And she's not a nag, thank goodness!
According to Maria Shriver as quoted in the LA Times this morning, we now live in "a woman's nation." Given the unrelenting and deafening chorus of "ain't women grand?", who can begrudge me my occasional criticism of the "fair" sex?
Doesn't SOMEONE have to speak out about the empress' new clothes? ("lovely, just lovely!")
By the way, I've always made sure not to lambaste ALL women. I've said nothing that necessarily applies to you. YOU may not be a controlling nag, but given the amount of shit published about women's dissatisfaction with men's household habits, wouldn't you agree that the media creates the impression that most (not all) women nag their husbands to clean up around the house?
It seems as though when you cut against the PC grain, you are "speaking truth to power." When I do it, I'm a misogynist? Oh, right. Except for a few places, such as this blog, as a man I'm not PRIVILEGED to make any critical comments about women.
Jay R at April 16, 2009 2:54 PM
JayR, you appear to be confusing the media's coverage of women with actual women. If you're going to accept the Ladies' Home Journal view of the world, then you also must believe that most women obsess over split ends and lipstick stains.
Amy, you are dreaming if you think most women still won't complain about what lazy slobs men are -- they aren't about to give up one of their favorite hobbies! Either the guy will get nagged to clean up, or the chick will clean up, then complain about it.
My boyfriend leaves his dirty clothes all around the laundry basket instead of putting them in the laundry basket. I asked him a few times to put them in the basket, but he has a weird mental block. So now I either leave them there or put them in the basket myself and forget about it. It's just not that big a deal. You seem to be basing your view of relationships on '80s sitcoms. In this scenario, I'm sure the men will retaliate by doing something hideous to the plumbing in an effort to prove their manhood.
Fair criticism of women is not a problem. Critcizing women just to even the playing field because you think men are getting a raw deal overall makes it difficult to weed the real criticism from the whining. And accusing Amy of squashing criticism of women is just...silly.
Part of the problem is that we only really hear about the horror stories of relationships. Last night, my boyfriend was sick, so I made him dinner and hot tea and rubbed his feet. This past week, he missed out on one of his favorite hobbies to go with me to the funeral of a woman he'd never met. No one is going to write a newspaper article about this stuff.
MonicaP at April 16, 2009 3:34 PM
So, the women here never nag their men about household chores? Hmmmm. Typical? LOVE to see some actual stats on that one.
MonicaP, I never said that Amy squashes criticism of women, and I acknowledged that this blog is one of the very rare places the same is allowed. I do not always agree with The Goddess, but I respect her tremendously.
I may indeed engage in a long howl about feminist-related issues -- but there is just SO much to howl about! After all, when will women run out of things to complain about when it comes to men? Never, it seems.
Jay R at April 16, 2009 4:07 PM
I can't nag my husband about household chores, he earns about 85% of the income. So for the most part, household stuff falls under my jurisdiction. As long as he helps with dishes sometimes and doesn't actively go out of his way to make messes, I really can't say anything.
NicoleK at April 16, 2009 5:15 PM
Not only do I not nag my husband about household chores, I am usually the one who needs to be nagged. I am usually afraid to admit this because women are not supposed to be slobs, but I generally could not care less about housework. If my husband leaves clothes on the floor (and it does happen often) it will stay on the floor until someone, usually him, does laundry. This is not spite on my part; I truly do not care if the sock is on the floor.
Karen at April 16, 2009 5:17 PM
Two types of people get married - fools and gold diggers, the former usually being the bewanged of the two.
Porky at April 16, 2009 8:48 PM
Jay R, is it possible for you to read one of these blogs without spouting your anti-women ideology? It's like you're arguing both sides of the page-you're attributing statements, behaviors, and arguments to women that NO ONE on this blog has made, and then arguing against them. Sure, some of your points are valid, but go spar with someone who legitimately disagrees with you, rather than picking fights where there are none.
Shannon Jones at April 17, 2009 1:08 AM
Jay R, so you endlessly "criticize" women but if a woman criticizes anyone who happens to be male at any time for anything under the sun, she's an evil male-bashing femi-Nazi.
I can't speak for anyone else but I feel damned fortunate not to be your wife. She has my sympathy.
Oh, and I hold by my out-clause. Anyone should be able to undo a mistake. And weren't you the one arguing against financial penalty for doing so? Or is it only men who shouldn't have to pay?
Hmmm, why do you feel you need to hold a woman by force? That you do is very telling.
I think it would be a great idea to make it harder to get married in the first place.
T's Grammy at April 17, 2009 6:59 AM
Hold a woman by force? Hell no! No woman, despite what she may think of HERSELF, is worth the effort. Don't want to stay? Don't let the screen door hit you on the way out, darlin'!
Holding on to my money and my children by force, well, that's something completely different, isn't it?
Regarding my comments concerning the "fair" sex, tough noogies! Anyone is free to point out where I have been either inaccurate or unreasonable, and I'll "take it like a man." (Notice how there is no equivalent phrase for women? Our expectations of women are SO low.)
I think most here are simply surprised to EVER read anything other than that women's shit smells like roses.
Jay R at April 17, 2009 8:20 AM
>>Regarding my comments concerning the "fair" sex, tough noogies!
Right on, Jay R. Noogies to the Evil Matriarchy!
Jody Tresidder at April 17, 2009 8:34 AM
> Two types of people get married -
> fools and gold diggers, the former
> usually being the bewanged
> of the two.
It's ironic and sad and mysterious how Amy seems to attract these wounded, snippy men's-rights types.
The almost never stick around, though. Once they figure out that no one will pay attention to their attack of caricatures, they stop visiting.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 17, 2009 10:40 AM
Anyone is free to point out where I have been either inaccurate or unreasonable, and I'll "take it like a man."
We have, dearie, time and time again. We've also protested at you putting words we didn't say into our mouths when you hear what you want to hear from us gals. Seems no matter how often Amy, me, and several of the others agree there are times men are given the shaft, you hear something else because we refuse to say all women would act as you expect or because we say things should be equal -- not favoring either gender.
But that's okay. You're alternatively irritating and amusing and even sometimes right on the spot.
One thing about Amy's board: she truly allows everyone to speak their mind. Sometimes we all get short-tempered and dissolve to childish sniping with someone we vehemently disagree with. I know I'm guilty and I think most everyone has been one time or another. We're only human. We get past that generally and still discuss and listen to each other pretty well.
I think that's rather cool. Amy's true talent is getting people thinking -- and talking. I say that makes a great writer, whatever the genre.
T's Grammy at April 17, 2009 10:41 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/16/eye_of_the_tige.html#comment-1643780">comment from T's GrammyAmy's true talent is getting people thinking -- and talking. I say that makes a great writer, whatever the genre.
Aww, thanks -- I try to do that. Nice that you notice.
Amy Alkon at April 17, 2009 11:06 AM
"You're alternatively irritating and amusing and even sometimes right on the spot."
Thanks, T's Grammy! 3 out of 3 ain't bad!
And being "snippy" makes it 4 for 4! Thanks, Crid! Oops. "Wounded." Sorry, Crid. Missed with that one, but you did swing for the fence. Better luck with your personal attack next time!
(I'll leave when Amy gets PC or, even worse, boring. I don't see that happening any time soon. But thanks for the invite!)
Jay R at April 17, 2009 11:43 AM
If your thoughts were more about logic than hurt feelings, you'd be much more interesting.
I know it's all in the archives, but we should start a list of the bitter guys who drift in, blow some snot about how feminism is the root of all evil, and then cut out in a week or so, after it turns out that nobody cares enough to quibble. (And –with due respect to all parties– this is a middle-class women's kind of blog. Who do these guys imagine would be enjoying their comments?)
I bet there've been 25 in the last five years. Presumably they found comfort somewhere else. (All they wanted was to be loved... was that so wrong??!?!)
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at April 17, 2009 12:36 PM
Part of that argument doesn't work. It's not marriage that makes you divorce, like the taco makes you sick, it's the people involved in the marriage. From your latest column (women gaining weight after marriage), to people denying the signs prior to marriage that cause divorce. People fail to realize that love that most people talk about is a feeling, just like any other feeling. You aren't happy continuously, or sad, or any other feeling. True love is loving the other person more than yourself - that only works if both parties do it. Marriage is like every other contract, but because the rules aren't delineated before hand, people don't know what they need to abide by.
I am a happily married woman with a happily married husband. But I don't consider my feelings first for anything and neither does my husband. Decisions are made by coming together and conversing and changes in our behavior are made by asking. No arguments, nor complaints, and a happy child to boot.
Belle at April 17, 2009 1:43 PM
"Two types of people get married - fools and gold diggers, the former usually being the bewanged of the two."
Two points for 'bewanged'. Damn, that's good.
I'm stealing it.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at April 17, 2009 1:59 PM
Leave a comment